The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

A7s!

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
:worthless:

I'm going into this with:bugeyes:

12 meg doesn't bother me if that kind of clean ISO is possible. I've had plenty of cameras that were 10 to 16 meg that worked just fine for a good deal of images. The A7R can do the rest.

- marc
Wish I could post them Marc, but the body I shot was definitely using prototype firmware, (Version 0.01 no less!) so is not fair and would likely get me tossed from the next press event if posted, so your just going to have to wait for the "official" release to see the actual images. Suffice it to say -get your order in - you will be impressed. I certainly was, and I am a hard guy to impress. :angel:
 
I have a shooting aquantance who feels the same way. He loves to use the best high ISO performing fat pixels cameras and exclusively use them for low light tripod supported shots solely at base ISO.
and logic behind this is (those cameras are either Nikon 12-16mp sensors or something like Canon 1Dx) what exactly ? do they perfrom better than D800* downscaled to their 12-16-18mp @ base ISO ? you can neither saturate the whole sensor there more than you can D800* nor beat D800* in readout noise... so what's the point ? @ base ISO D800* beats or matches those cameras (when you scale the image to their mp) in SNR (above deep shadows performance) and annihilates them in DR (deep shadows performance)... now if you go to high gains they can outdo Sony Semi, but at base ISO :confused:
 
I am much more interested what benefit, if any, I would get from files at base ISO.
Not much, because the sensor size is the same and no new tech was announced to reduce the readout noise noticeably... unless you want to pixel peep the lonely sensel... specifically when Sony Imaging is known to get less numbers (DR wise) from Sony Semi sensors vs what others can do (compare D610 vs A7 for example)... so don't really dream about more than 0.5 stops (when you scale A7r or A7 down to 12mp of A7s) gain for the wholse sensor (vs Sony models, less vs Nikon cameras) and if that camera is more optimized (vs A7r, A7) for highspeed readout for video than stills performance will be compromised...
 

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
@ Marc:

I agree with your points re. high ISO completely (and your point about 12Mp being enough for a lot of work). My question relates to nostatic's requirement (and many others like him, including me) of the need to shoot in dim environments that also have very bright spots that one wants to see into in the same frame. One of the aspects of shooting neg. film is its shoulder and toe (or was it knee?) capacity (highlights that have details and shadows that have details), even though the ASA was relatively low.

And shooting video outside, when there's way too much light, or more precisely, when the difference between open sunlight and shadow is so great that you can only expose for one or the other. I suspect that the A7s will perform very well in these situations. The OM5 I am using as one of my bodies has that flakey highlight and shadow adjustment screen; I want an intelligent application of that which analyses the scene, and uses that huge DR to allow you to 'pull' a "zone of acceptable exposure" through an image (like a slice of in focus). Having details at both ends of the range would allow incredible video. I know that all can be down in Raw, but as these devices get smarter, not too big an ask, you'd think.
 

ZoranC

New member
and logic behind this is (those cameras are either Nikon 12-16mp sensors or something like Canon 1Dx) what exactly ? do they perfrom better than D800* downscaled to their 12-16-18mp @ base ISO ? you can neither saturate the whole sensor there more than you can D800* nor beat D800* in readout noise... so what's the point ? @ base ISO D800* beats or matches those cameras (when you scale the image to their mp) in SNR (above deep shadows performance) and annihilates them in DR (deep shadows performance)... now if you go to high gains they can outdo Sony Semi, but at base ISO :confused:
Not much, because the sensor size is the same and no new tech was announced to reduce the readout noise noticeably... unless you want to pixel peep the lonely sensel... specifically when Sony Imaging is known to get less numbers (DR wise) from Sony Semi sensors vs what others can do (compare D610 vs A7 for example)... so don't really dream about more than 0.5 stops (when you scale A7r or A7 down to 12mp of A7s) gain for the wholse sensor (vs Sony models, less vs Nikon cameras) and if that camera is more optimized (vs A7r, A7) for highspeed readout for video than stills performance will be compromised...
I heard those arguments before and according to them picture taken with gazzilion pixels sensor will, when downscaled to one pixel, have infinite dynamic range, infinite tonality, etc, and will be always much better than picture taken with sensor of same size that has one pixel.

However, I am not a practicing sensor physicist, nor I play one on the 'net, I am just a guy that is trying to use some common sense, and my gut feeling is nagging me that something doesn't sound right with that picture. So I will not be wasting my time getting entangled in wannabe academic discussions, instead I will wait for A7S, put it side by side with my A7R and see will those fat pixels deliver to me what I am speculating they might or not. If they do great, if they don't it will still be worth my effort.
 

jfirneno

Member
Did anyone see these non scientific high iso tests?

Sony A7s ISO Comparison
Rafael:
Yes I saw that the other day. Nice to see the range of ISO. Only wish the raw files existed. The high noise reduction makes it difficult to evaluate how useful the middle (12,800 to 51,200) ISO levels will be. Suffice it to say that at least 2 (and maybe more) stops of usable ISO will exist over the already very good capability of the A7R. I only need really clean ISO 6,400 (would love really clean 12,800) so this camera is very exciting to me (as long as the autofocus can actually take advantage of 6,400 and above). But as a long time Sony follower I think it's several months after general availability by the public before we can say with assurance whether this camera is "the one" Sony camera for indoor shooting.

Regards,
John
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
Sony is certainly converting a lot of photographers. Many switched from MFD to the Nikon D800/e, and now many are switching from the D800/e to the Sony A7/r/s. This is one of the few companies that are stepping up with innovative products at reasonable price points. With the A7s pixel pitch being somewhere around 8.4, this should result in very clean ISO up to 12,800 and most likely good for fast sports - fat pixels rule for soaking up color! the Sony "S" also shoots up to 200fps, albeit, lower resolution, but 200fps!
 

horshack

New member
I heard those arguments before and according to them picture taken with gazzilion pixels sensor will, when downscaled to one pixel, have infinite dynamic range, infinite tonality, etc, and will be always much better than picture taken with sensor of same size that has one pixel.

However, I am not a practicing sensor physicist, nor I play one on the 'net, I am just a guy that is trying to use some common sense, and my gut feeling is nagging me that something doesn't sound right with that picture. So I will not be wasting my time getting entangled in wannabe academic discussions, instead I will wait for A7S, put it side by side with my A7R and see will those fat pixels deliver to me what I am speculating they might or not. If they do great, if they don't it will still be worth my effort.
To see this visually, here is a High ISO comparison I did between the 16MP Nikon Df and 36MP Nikon D800; the A7s will likely perform similarly to the Df and the A7r has the same sensor as the D800.

Df vs D800 vs 6D High ISO and DR
 
I heard those arguments before and according to them picture taken with gazzilion pixels sensor will, when downscaled to one pixel, have infinite dynamic range, infinite tonality, etc, and will be always much better than picture taken with sensor of same size that has one pixel.
no such arguments were made... we are not talking about 1 sensel per sensor or "gazzilion pixels" per sensor... we are talking just about 12mp vs 24mp or 12mp vs 36mp... what does your "common sense" (quoted intentionally, because it is not) says about performance of D4/D4s/Df/1Dx vs D800*/D600/D610 ? do you see some magical unexplained increase in performance when 36/24mp are downscaled to 16/18mp of those ? indeed there are benefits that Nikon or Canon architecture vs Sony architecture achieve @ high gains (but not at base ISO where the friend of the poster for unknown reasons try to use those cameras) - but A7s has a Sony sensor and most probably same Sony tech (multiple ADCs on die)... so to expect any drastic changes is not a common sense at all for still shots.




my gut feeling is nagging me that something doesn't sound right with that picture.
what does your gut say about the shape of Earth ? do you feel that it is a geoid ?
 

ZoranC

New member
no such arguments were made... we are not talking about 1 sensel per sensor or "gazzilion pixels" per sensor... we are talking just about 12mp vs 24mp or 12mp vs 36mp...
I see you didn't recognize common sense I am was referring to. Let me help you by making it simpler: Logic that says "36MP downsized to 12 MP will result in better picture (better dynamic range etc)" can be extended to "1 gazzilion megapixels downsized to 12 MP will be even better". Then that logic can be further extended to "1 gazzilion megapixels downsized to 8, 4, 2, 1, 0.5 MP will keep getting even better and better until DR etc becomes infinite when downsized to just one pixel". And we know infinite DR etc is impossible.

what does your gut say about the shape of Earth ? do you feel that it is a geoid ?
My gut feeling doesn't have to tell me anything about shape of Earth. But your post is telling me two things: 1. Poster might come over to GetDPI from DPR, but will not necessarily leave DPR part of them at the door. 2. DPR village is missing you.
 

drofnad

Member
I see you didn't recognize common sense I am was referring to. Let me help you ...
...
that logic can be further extended to "1 gazzilion megapixels downsized to 8, 4, 2, 1, 0.5 MP will keep getting even better and better until DR etc becomes infinite when downsized to just one pixel". And we know infinite DR etc is impossible.
Preferring that we don't over-help each other, let me just toss out a couple of snippets from forums-chatter elsewhere (FM) related to this point, and suggest that there need to be pixels sufficient to present the image hoped to be cleaned of image-detractors such as noise.

In the case at hand, one can ask how Guy et al. have found such downsizing --if tried?-- to improve (print?) IQ, which improvement could be compared to the hoped-for ability of the A7s & D4s & DF.

One of the most important aspects of a high-res camera (I know, I nag about this...) is that you can downsample the images. A downsampled image will --if it is done right-- contain loads and loads more of actual real reality-based detail in the image file.
I've shown the difference between a D3x downsampled => 12MP file and a D700 native 12MP file many times. When you see them side by side the D700 at it's native resolution looks like something that's been up-sampled in comparison. It makes you wonder about the "12MP" label we put on the image, since it doesn't even closely resemble an image with all 12MPs filled with real resolution detail.

[ Another poster adds ]
I'd always known my 5Dc to be far superior to my 1Ds3 at ISO 1600 till I downrezzed to match resolution when suddenly not only was the noise better but, even at the same pixel count, so was the detail.
At least it's nice to see the mpix lust now going in both directions --from the typical (recently alleged by Kirk Tuck no longer right (!)) "more = better", to now "fewer = really nice"!
.:. Anything but what we have, eh? :D


-drofnad
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Hey folks lets leave the personal insults at the door or I will sweep you off the mat. This is not DPR. My hard arch moment here is I do not like any insults directed at anyone its not the GetDPI way. Capice
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
To the question at hand Phase One on there IQ backs has a technology called pixel binning. In essence it takes a 60 mpx back and knocks it down to 15mpx through a process to get higher ISO images at 15 mpx. I had one and ISO 1600 was very clean when shot in this mode compared to the full 60mpx which was about the same as ISO 400. This is a technology that is different than simply downsizing say from 36mpx to 12 or 24 although that effect works its a different technology. I don't know enough technically to speak on this subject but yea you can downsize to get better looking files . Problem here is you bringing your file size down which in turn also brings your print sizing down as well. Its a trade off no doubt but here with this Sony sensor its a little different because we are not talking about the same sensor as lets say knocking down the A7r to 12 mpx. The new S sensor has big photo sites that absorb light which in turn can give you higher ISO. Maybe someone can explain this process better than me but my educated guess is the S sensor outside of video should produce a higher ISO value compared to the 36mpx sensor. Which BTW at 1600 is good but not awesome. Cams like the DF, D4 with the lower mpx sensors work in the same way. My guess would be this S sensor should perform similar or better to those Nikons. Now until we get it in our hands we don't know how it will compare to them but even if we get a D4 higher ISO values in our Sonys than we just got a bonus on it. I personally would be happy with the D4 higher ISO values which I think are very clean at least 3200. Ill take that in a heartbeat.

But if you can pull Doug from the MF section he can explain Pixel Binning far better than my comments that are used on the Phase backs its pretty interesting technology they are using
 

ZoranC

New member
Preferring that we don't over-help each other, let me just toss out a couple of snippets from forums-chatter elsewhere (FM) related to this point, and suggest that there need to be pixels sufficient to present the image hoped to be cleaned of image-detractors such as noise.

In the case at hand, one can ask how Guy et al. have found such downsizing --if tried?-- to improve (print?) IQ, which improvement could be compared to the hoped-for ability of the A7s & D4s & DF.



At least it's nice to see the mpix lust now going in both directions --from the typical (recently alleged by Kirk Tuck no longer right (!)) "more = better", to now "fewer = really nice"!
.:. Anything but what we have, eh? :D


-drofnad
I agree that downsizing will help with detail but detail is not the only thing in overall image perception I am interested in. And I too am very much interested how all of that will carry over into prints. I don't feel loads of technical analysis will give me as clear of a picture (pun intended) as will quick side-by-side look done to my personal taste. So A7S here I come once it is out (as long as price is within reason).

And yes, anything but what we have, it's afterall common thread of many-a-forum :)
 

mmbma

Active member
i can't wait for this to come out. I think the at ISO 100k the files would be actually usable in black & white..... I miss the 10k ISO on the monochrom so much after I sold the camera, almost bought it back. then the A7s was announced. I'm glad I waited
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
End of day no matter where you sit with your style of photography or whatever creative endeavor you take on as a shooter this is something all of us will watch closely. I know as many here as still shooters don't care too much about video or vis versa this has a certain charm to it that maybe just a great tool to have at our disposal. I think the very cool part about this announcement and the new Pentax 645 is some real ground breaking advancements. Buy it or not either one we have to give both companies our respect for taking some risks and as a industry that seems to be sliding this is good news. I'm certainly embracing all of it and some great discussions to come on these products and some fun tools to explore.
 

ZoranC

New member
End of day no matter where you sit with your style of photography or whatever creative endeavor you take on as a shooter this is something all of us will watch closely. I know as many here as still shooters don't care too much about video or vis versa this has a certain charm to it that maybe just a great tool to have at our disposal. I think the very cool part about this announcement and the new Pentax 645 is some real ground breaking advancements. Buy it or not either one we have to give both companies our respect for taking some risks and as a industry that seems to be sliding this is good news. I'm certainly embracing all of it and some great discussions to come on these products and some fun tools to explore.
Exactly! Advancements benefit us all in the long run even if something is not of interest to particular individual at particular time. That is universally applicable.
 
Top